4 ms·
There’s dozens of millions of articles total, not thousands.
by aldanor 8y ago
There’s dozens of millions of articles total, not thousands.
- logicallee 8y agowow. I didn't know there were a grand total of dozens of millions of journal articles published total worldwide. My guess would have been hundreds of thousands at most. These are journal articles, not high school book reports, right? I'm astounded at the number you quote. For example there are about 10,000 papers submitted per month to all of arxiv[1] - which is a huge number. That totals 132k per year or so. For there to be "dozens of millions" of journal articles, that would mean arxiv has just 0.83% of them. Given the very low bar to publishing on arXiv I would think if you compared the number of arxiv articles as a percentage of all pubished journal articles, it would be a lot more than 0.83%! So the "dozens of millions" of journal articles is extremely astounding to me. https://arxiv.org/stats/monthly_submissions https://arxiv.org/stats/monthly_submissions
- nneonneo 8y agoarXiv only handles a small corner of scientific publications, so 0.83% doesn't sound out of whack. Most folks in biology or chemistry aren't on there, for example. A Nature study from 2014 (http://blogs.nature.com/news/2014/05/global-scientific-output-doubles-every-nine-years.html http://blogs.nature.com/news/2014/05/global-scientific-outpu...) pegs the number of papers published between 1980 and 2012, with at least one citation, at 38 million. So, 69 million publications including uncited ones and ones from outside this time range actually sounds like an underestimate - that is, the 69 million paper archive is probably missing a fair number of articles.
- jacquesm 8y agoThere are a lot of scientists and they work hard (and get paid peanuts, which seems unfair).
- zouhair 8y agoUnfair and utterly stupid of humanity.